PEOPLE STATE NEW YORK v. RICHARD ANTHONY MANCUSO (05/22/69)

DISTRICT COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST DISTRICT, SUFFOLK COUNTY
1969.NY.41691 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 300 N.Y.S.2d 1003; 59 Misc. 2d 941
May 22, 1969
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF,v.RICHARD ANTHONY MANCUSO, DEFENDANT
Thomas J. Connelly for defendant.
George J. Aspland, District Attorney, for plaintiff.
John Copertino, J.
Author: Copertino

John Copertino, J.

Author: Copertino

The defendant, charged with the misdemeanor possession of a loaded revolver in violation of subdivision 2 of section 265.05 of the Penal Law moves to transfer the complaint to the Family Court pursuant to section 813 of the Family Court Act.

The weapon came to the attention of the police when the defendant's wife called them following a heated argument between her and the defendant.

Section 813 of the Family Court Act directs a transfer where the offenses of disorderly conduct or an assault are charged. People v. Fowlkes (supra) holds that the transfer of a crime other than assault or disorderly conduct is required when the crime charged relies on an assault "or the intent to commit it." If a nonassault crime depends or is "inextricably related" to an assault or an intent to commit an assault, then a transfer is in order. In the Fowlkes case the Court of Appeals ruled that the possession of a dangerous knife "with intent to use the same unlawfully against another" (Penal Law, § 1897, subd. 9) and a breaking and entering with intent to assault were inextricably related to an intent on the part of the defendant to assault his wife. Absent this intent, the acts of the defendant would have gone almost without notice. "The burglary charge, without the intent to assault, fails and leaves only the criminally ambiguous fact that a husband broke into his wife's apartment. For similar and even stronger reasons, without the assault the possession of the knife may not be criminal at all." (People v. Fowlkes, supra, p. 286.)

Not so here, however; wrongful possession of the weapon does not depend upon an intent by the defendant to use it upon his wife. The act complained of is prosecutable completely absent an intent to use it on his wife. Possession was wrongful and illegal long before any dispute between defendant and his wife arose, and would have continued so after their feelings subsided. It was only incidental that an act wrongful in and of itself came to light as the result of an argument between the defendant and his wife.

As a matter of fact, there is not even a charge of assault present upon which the possession of a gun may be said to rely.

Under these circumstances the court fails to see the applicability of Fowlkes and denies the motion.

Disposition

Under these circumstances the court fails to see the applicability of Fowlkes and denies the motion.

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.